I don't think it is a lack of interest, it is just that many of us have been
through this before on the list and just about all of us have encountered
someone like this guy.  You begin to get desensitized to looting.  No matter
what we say this guy will loot, however all the complaining amongst
ourselves will not likely solve the problem.  We need to educate the public
to inform the ignorant that they are doing something wrong and encourage
legislation that will stop those who don't care that they are doing
something wrong.  We need to do a better job of these things, if we are to
rid public of looters.

Maybe this will spark some interest.

M. Jay Stottman
Kentucky Archaeological Survey
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tonia Deetz" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: high-brow looting in New England


> I am surprised that this article has elicited no interest from the
listserve
> members (perhaps you hashed it all out at the meeting in Mobile?) The
article
> raises several questions, but primarily, who has determined the sites that
> our "dig-guy" mucks about in as insignificant? Why do places like the
Fuller
> Museum seem so taken with archaeological plunder? How can the NY Times
write
> an article without getting the other point of view, from those in the
> archaeological field?
>
> It seems that if turn around were fair play, that I should decide, with my
> art training, to be the art-girl, and take some lesser known modiglianis
or
> perhaps some hoppers and Parrishes and cut them up to recontextualize the
> different shades of blue, they really are more fun from a painting than
> getting them at the art store! Perhaps Mr. Dion can start development for
> "artifact decopage," and give Martha Stewart a run for her money at
K-Mart?
> Perhaps we can decontextualize some rare species next, and rearrange the
> anatomy of a bengal tiger to suit a new and interesting aestetic sense "a
la
> Mr. Dion?" What does it matter that it destroys something in the process
that
> is irreplaceable?
>
> It is appalling that this kind of mucking about can be written up,
condoned
> and elebrated by several museums and has readers left with the idea that
this
> is not doing harm to archaeological sites now and potentially in the
future.
>
>  Tonia Deetz Rock